Spending Cuts Spark Fears Of 8% Rise In Rail Fares

[Kyoto]

Sickening -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10982871

Just like the banks, train companies are essentially abusing their near monopoly to skim from the productive economy.

It's a tax on productivity, and again just like the banks, one which operates in a system of privatised profits and socialised losses.

[MrFlibble]

Sickening -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10982871

Just like the banks, train companies are essentially abusing their near monopoly to skim from the productive economy.

It's a tax on productivity, and again just like the banks, one which operates in a system of privatised profits and socialised losses.

Welcome to your new life in serfdom...

[GordonBrownSpentMyFuture]

HOORAY!

[Snugglybear]

I hate that Britain seems to be constantly used as a giant free market economics test specimen. We need to ditch the dogma and decide what's important in life. Good reliable affordable railways are a must for economic development.

Can we expect any such policy under the present government?

I though not.

[lets get it right]

Good reliable affordable railways are a must for economic development.

Looks like a contradiction in terms to me.

By definition a railway service that is frequent, reliable and with enough capacity to deal with the huge demand in the mornings and evenings will be expensive.

As someone who never travels on trains because I find them uncomfortable and claustrophobic - I'm not clear why I should help to pay for them?

Surely what we need to stop is the insanity of millions of people, every day, twice a day, travelling to and from work on trains. London these days is particularly nuts. People commute from places like Lincoln, Peterborough and Bristol for heaven's sake. It's completely barking and, of course, is largely caused by London's property prices.

[repetitive bleats]

Last week I went to Glasgow. £125 return.

is that all? I cancelled a meeting in Stoke the other day after checking the price of a day return fare from Brighton. It was (and still is as i just checked) £268

[thecrashingisles]

Surely what we need to stop is the insanity of millions of people, every day, twice a day, travelling to and from work on trains. London these days is particularly nuts. People commute from places like Lincoln, Peterborough and Bristol for heaven's sake. It's completely barking and, of course, is largely caused by London's property prices.

The invention of the internet should have solved that problem for most people.

[@contradevian]

is that all?  I cancelled a meeting in Stoke the other day after checking the price of a day return fare from Brighton.  It was (and still is as i just checked) £268

Then again I can travel from Manchester to London for about £12, provided I don't mind getting in at Euston around midnight.

[sexton]

Surely what we need to stop is the insanity of millions of people, every day, twice a day, travelling to and from work on trains. London these days is particularly nuts. People commute from places like Lincoln, Peterborough and Bristol for heaven's sake. It's completely barking and, of course, is largely caused by London's property prices.

Hopefully cuts in housing benefit will force out the poor from London and free up housing for those who need to work there.

[fluffy666]

As someone who never travels on trains because I find them uncomfortable and claustrophobic - I'm not clear why I should help to pay for them?

Well, get rid of them and see what happens to road congestion..

[piece of paper]

Will the rail companies need bigger subsidies when the public sector cuts start? There must be a fair number of civil servants who commute into London daily.

I suppose the converse may be true. If you need a massive subsidy because of the large passenger numbers, a smaller subsidy might be appropriate if there are fewer passengers.

p-o-p

[Dorkins]

By definition a railway service that is frequent, reliable and with enough capacity to deal with the huge demand in the mornings and evenings will be expensive.

I agree that the railways will probably always be more expensive than private cars with oil prices where they are, but it's fair to ask why the cost of running them has risen so much since 1995. This is pretty damning:

The total amount paid in fares by rail passengers has doubled since privatisation to more than £5 billion a year. But the total subsidy has risen even faster, reaching £6.3 billion last year, four times what British Rail received in a typical year.

The rail network is carrying 50 per cent more passengers than in BR’s last year but the cost of running it is three times as high.

Link

To me, that seems like a pretty serious failure to control costs, much like other parts of the public sector where pouring in more money year after year did much more to raise costs than it did to increase output.

[Guest_FaFa!_*]

To me, that seems like a pretty serious failure to control costs, much like other parts of the public sector

[Dorkins]

Network Rail is a nationalised company, and the train operating companies are so heavily regulated and subsidised during their contracts that they might as well be.

[lets get it right]

Well, get rid of them and see what happens to road congestion..

All I'm saying is ... if the businesses in London and the people who commute to them had to pay for their journeys themselves (as opposed to me paying for part of their journeys by way of tax) - businesses would immediately relocate to places where people could travel to and from work easily (on a bike even) and the insanity of millions of people needing billions in tax subisidies just so they can be transported like cattle to and from work would disappear.

Likewise the insanity of the London property market would disappear too as business left the capital.

[Home_To_Roost]

Its a criminal situation on the railways in this country. A real conman's charter. Last week I went to Glasgow. £125 return. In April I went to Barcelona by train £200 return and that included two nights in a private compartment and breakfast each morning.

I agree ... it is outrageous . A few months ago I wanted to travel to Up North. I looked at the rail fares, but then I realised it would be cheaper to fill the car up with petrol, AND buy a satnav ... and still save £60

Edited August 16, 2010 by Home_To_Roost

[bomberbrown]

Hopefully cuts in housing benefit will force out the poor from London and free up housing for those who need to work there.

Amen to that notion brother.

[EUBanana]

It's often cheaper to rent a car and put petrol in it then it is to take the train to where you want to go.

I've had some business dealings with Network Rail, and can attest to their utter uselessness and ineptitude.

[crash2006]

Network Rail is a nationalised company, and the train operating companies are so heavily regulated and subsidised during their contracts that they might as well be.

Agreed, why should private companies get tax money, i thought the whole issus was to free up government money in other areas and let the private market deal with it.

[zebbedee]

Good reliable affordable railways are a must for economic development.

Looks like a contradiction in terms to me.

By definition a railway service that is frequent, reliable and with enough capacity to deal with the huge demand in the mornings and evenings will be expensive.

Faster,Cheaper,Better-pick two

[pathfinder]

I went from a daily commuter to 3 times a year due to the costs.

Take a crap job £6.37 hr, no commute, + £48 a week tax credits (one partner not working atm) works out to be the same as having 23k in the big smoke with a £110 a week ticket.

It takes me 15 mins to get home the works dumbed down so im not stressed, get 2 takeaways thrown in, and im gathering +3 hrs free time back.

[aa3]

For the amounts going to subsidize commuter rail, that could also be invested in improving roadways. Like putting in more overpasses.

[piece of paper]

For the amounts going to subsidize commuter rail, that could also be invested in improving roadways. Like putting in more overpasses.

Given the parlous state of the nation's finances, could we have a neither option?

p-o-p

[Oliver Sutton]

All I'm saying is ... if the businesses in London and the people who commute to them had to pay for their journeys themselves (as opposed to me paying for part of their journeys by way of tax)

But they do, and some.

Lines in and out of London make a profit.

[ken_ichikawa]

Railways have always seemed a silly idea to me..

I mean why don't they concrete over ALL of the railways and replace them with uber bendy buses instead? Since railways are straight you could feasibly put a 10 car bendy bus thing on them, and there is no need to worry about pedestrians and other cars either.

Since concrete is pretty much indestructable therefore needing less maintenance, to boot you can still use the electrified sections with things like trolley buses they have in Russia.

Also buses weigh somewhat less.

A quick search says a bus for 84 people weighs in at 11 tons while a similar train car would weigh massively more.